Youth justice: rearranging the deckchairs or real reform? (original) (raw)

Submission: Proposed Reforms to Youth Justice in Queensland

Legal Affairs and Community Safety Committee, 2013

The proposed reforms to the youth justice system in Queensland are premised on the assumption that offending by young people is increasing. We noted (Carrington, Dwyer, Hutchinson and Richards 2012, 8) in a recent submission about the boot camps legislation that: Statistics suggest that this concern is not warranted. Certainly studies show that 'rates per 100,000 juveniles in detention in Queensland have been relatively stable compared with the national trend' (Richards 2011) and that rates of detention of child offenders have declined generally in Australia over the last three decades. Youth offending statistics are affected by the diversion options used by the police, as well as by the numbers and levels of policing, and any special strategies such as Operation Colossus in the northern part of the state. 'Community concern' about crime does not always reflect the true rates of crime across Queensland. Policy should be based on valid evidence, not on 'community concern'. With stable numbers of young people being detained in Australia, the research clearly suggests that youth offending is not escalating. Boot Camps Question: Are the Sentenced Youth Boot Camps/Early Intervention Youth Boot Camps good ways to stop the cycle of youth crime and close the revolving door of youth detention? Our position: Against: There is no empirical evidence to suggest boot camps are good for stopping the cycle of youth crime and closing the revolving door of youth detention. Further, we have concerns that the Early Intervention Youth Boot Camp may in fact draw young people into the criminal justice system who would ordinarily not have had any contact with the system. Evidence:-Wilson et al.'s (2005) meta-analysis of 32 robust research studies of militaristic boot camps concluded that 'this common and defining feature of a boot-camp is not effective in reducing post boot-camp offending'.-Wilson and Lipsey's (2000) research has clearly demonstrated that boot camps and wilderness camps are ineffective unless they include a strong therapeutic focus on education, families, and psychological and behavioural change. Question: Are there other ways to stop the cycle of youth crime and detention for young people who are committing serious or repeat crimes and to get young people back on track? Our position: There are better ways to stop the cycle of youth crime and detention for young people who are committing serious or repeat crimes and to get young people back on track. Evidence: Research suggests that diversion is a more effective method of reducing reoffending (Carrington and Pereira 2009; Cunneen and White 2011). There are a number of effective programs which stop the cycle

Where has all the Youth Crime Gone? Youth Justice in an Age of Austerity

Children & Society, 2014

Youth justice under the Coalition government in England and Wales has been characterised by considerable gains-falling youth crime, increased diversion and substantial reductions in child imprisonment-that would generally be associated with a progressive agenda. Focusing on youth justice policy in England and Wales, this article suggests that the tensions implicit in a government of the new right delivering outcomes that demonstrate an increased tolerance to children who offend, can be explained by the logic of austerity. That same logic brings with it other policy measures that are potentially less compatible with children's wellbeing. The youth crime of today is not what it used to be Youth crime in England and Wales under the UK Coalition government is not what it was, in at least two senses. First, there is significantly less of it. In 2012, 47,019 children below the age of 18 years received a formal pre-court disposal 1 or conviction for an indictable offence compared with 73,712 in 2010 when the new administration came to power, a decline of almost 36% (Ministry of Justice, 2013). 2 Second, youth crime is no longer the 'hot' political issue that it once was. From the early 1990s to the mid-2000s, youth justice constituted the locus of what has been referred to as a 'partisan 'arms race'' (Centre for Social Justice, 2012:26) wherein the main political parties vied to demonstrate their tough credentials to the electorate (Pitts, 2003). This 'punitive turn' is generally understood as a manifestation of an internationally changed orientation towards crime and offenders whose origins lie, over the longer term, in social and economic changes associated with late modernity (Garland, 2001). There were, of course, significant differences between adult justice systems and those that deal with children, and between the UK and other Western jurisdictions, but while it stood in the vanguard, England and Wales thus not totally exceptional in this regard, although direct policy transfer was more likely with the United States than with European neighbours (Muncie, 2008). New Labour's engagement in this process was an enthusiastic one: during the 1997 election campaign, one of the party's 'five pledges' to the public was to ensure swifter punishment for 1 Formal pre-court disposals comprise: reprimands, final warnings, youth cautions and youth conditional cautions 2 Although the focus of this article is England and Wales, youth crime has also fallen sharply in many other Western jurisdictions for reasons that are not entirely understood

Youth Justice Pathways to Change: Drivers, Challenges and Opportunities

Youth Justice

How and why does youth justice change? This article examines the nature and foci of change in youth justice by analysing this change as situated within processes that occur along pathways, rather than as triggered by measurable causes acting in linear ways. Our analytical framework is constituted by a series of identified potential pathways to change that are distinct, yet mutually reciprocal: political, paradigmatic, research-led and cognisant. The intention is to test key assumptions and to open up debate about the nature of youth justice change and how it can be constructed, understood and influenced.

Repairing the harm of youth crime

2000

Paper presented at workshop 7 at the conference "Youth justice 2000 - managing a new world in transit", Singapore, 13-15 September 2000, by Adam Graycar, Director, Australian Institute of Criminology. This speech is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

Jersey Youth Justice Review 2018

2019

This Review is intended to address a recommendation of the Independent Jersey Care Inquiry that "the youth justice system move to a model that always treats young offenders as children first and offenders second". We believe, as do the Council of Ministers and the wider Government, that we have a fundamental responsibility to ensure that children are protected within the criminal justice system. The Inquiry has laid bare the historic failures of Jersey's system of child protection, and in particular the treatment of children in the care of the state. Young people who find themselves involved in the criminal justice system as victims, witnesses or offenders are often those most in need of help. We must ensure that in future, even where young people have done wrong, the Government of Jersey considers their needs not their behaviour and we do not lose sight of the fact that they are, first and foremost, children. This review drew on local expertise, but was led by a UK expert, Professor Jonathan Evans from the University of South Wales. This was done to ensure that the review was independent and external, and to avoid the Jersey 'system' from investigating its own shortcomings. It finds good practice and best intentions throughout the criminal justice system, but also many areas that can be improved. It makes a significant number of recommendations that have been accepted in principle by the Council of Ministers. These recommendations are significant and wide-ranging, and bringing them to fruition will require the commitment of time, resources and political will across all parts of the Government. As a first step, we have instructed officers of Justice and Home Affairs and Children, Young People, Education and Skills to determine how these recommendations may best be implemented and to return to the Council of Ministers with a detailed plan of action by the Autumn. This is a rare opportunity to make a comprehensive and coherent set of improvements to the criminal justice system that will, we believe, make a significant difference to some of the most vulnerable children in our society. It will also allow the Government to demonstrate its commitment to 'putting children first'.